How to Use this Blog

NEW NEW NEW

OUR ADDRESS: http://blog.americanindianadoptees.com/

Howdy! We've amassed tons of information and important history on this blog since 2010. If you have a keyword, use the search box below. Also check out the reference section above. If you have a question or need help searching, use the contact form at the bottom of the blog.

ALSO, if you buy any of the books at the links provided, the editor will earn a small amount of money or commission. (we thank you) (that is our disclaimer statement)

This is a blog. It is not a peer-reviewed journal, not a sponsored publication... The ideas, news and thoughts posted are sourced… or written by the editor or contributors.

2018: 3/4 million+ Visitors/Readers! This blog was ranked #49 in top 100 blogs about adoption. Let's make it #1...

It Takes a Movement to Raise an Indian Child

As the Indigenous peoples of this land, countless generations have built a base of wisdom about how to raise our children in community.

Last month, a federal district court made an egregious
ruling ignoring the government-to-government relationship between tribal
nations and the federal government. In Brackeen v. Zinke,
the U.S. District Court in Northern Texas ruled in favor of Texas,
Indiana and Louisiana and several foster and adoptive families,
declaring that the Indian Child Welfare Act
(ICWA) is a race-based law lacking a present-day articulation of its
need. The court found ICWA to be unconstitutional. In this context, it
is important to elevate the lingering effects of historical governmental
policies and practices on Native children and families — including the
removal of tribal nations from their traditional homelands to
reservations, relocation of Native peoples to major cities, and numerous
efforts to assimilate Native children.

Prior
to contact with European immigrants, tribal practices and beliefs about
raising a child allowed a natural system of child protection to
flourish. Traditional Indian spiritual beliefs reinforced that all
things had a spiritual nature that demanded respect, including children.
Not only were children respected, they were taught to respect others.
Extraordinary patience and tolerance marked the methods that were used
to teach Indian children self-discipline. At the heart of this natural
system were beliefs, traditions and customs involving extended family
with clear roles and responsibilities. Responsibilities shared by
extended family and community members made protection of children the
responsibility of all people in the community. Within the natural safety
net of traditional tribal settings and beliefs, child maltreatment was
rarely a problem.

As European migration to the United States increased,
traditional tribal practices in raising children were devalued or lost
as federal programs sought to systematically assimilate Native people.
Efforts to “civilize” the Native population were almost always focused
on children. It began as early as 1609, when the Virginia Company, in a
written document, authorized the kidnapping of Indian children for the
purpose of civilizing local Indian populations through the use of
Christianity. The “Civilization Fund Act” passed by Congress in 1819
authorized grants to private agencies, primarily churches, to establish
programs in tribal communities designed to “civilize the Indian.”

Removing and relocating Native people onto reservations
between 1830 and 1871 forced tribes to leave behind customs tied to
their traditional lands, adjust their economies, and change their ways
of life without the support promised by the federal government.

A class in penmanship at the Red Deer Indian Industrial School. Photo courtesy Victoria University Archives.

From the 1860s through the 1970s, the federal government
and private agencies established large boarding schools, far from
reservations, where Indian children were placed involuntarily. Agents of
the federal government had the authority to withhold food and clothing
from parents who resisted sending their children away. In boarding
schools, children were not able to use their Native languages or
traditional customs, were required to wear uniforms and cut their hair,
and were subjected to military discipline and standards.

As the federal government began to recognize how the
removal and reservation of tribal communities hurt Native people, it
instituted the Indian Relocation Act of 1956, moving thousands of
Natives to large cities. This program not only broke down family
systems, but also left families and individuals stranded away from their
communities and natural support systems in unfamiliar environments.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the child welfare system became
another avenue that state and federal governments used to force the
assimilation of Native children. During this era, 25 to 35 percent of
all Native children were separated from their families — and 90 percent
of children removed were placed in non-Native homes.

In 1978, the passage of ICWA acknowledged the inherent
sovereign right of tribal governments and the critical role they play in
protecting their member children and maintaining families.

In the face of centuries of unjust treatment of Native
families and communities by federal and state governments, tribal
governments have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of our
families and to raise our children within tribal communities. Advocates
in Indian Country are uniting because we know the adage “it takes a
village” is truer now that it ever has been — today, it takes a movement
to raise an Indian child.

Sarah Kastelic is executive director of the
National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA) — the only national
American Indian organization focused specifically on tribal capacity to
prevent and respond to child abuse and neglect. Before coming to NICWA,
Kastelic served the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI),
including founding the NCAI Policy Research Center.

Friday, November 2, 2018

At
the Gathering for our Children and Returning Adoptees Powwow in 2015,
the American Indian community in Minneapolis welcomes home Native people
who were raised in foster care or adopted out. (Photo
courtesy of Red Lake Nation News.)

By Camille Erickson

Each year, the Minneapolis American Indian Center fills with
adoptees, formerly fostered individuals and families for the Gathering
For Our Children and Returning Adoptees Powwow. Now in its fifteenth
year, the powwow is held on Saturday, Nov. 3 2018 at the Minneapolis American
Indian Center (MAIC) to once again provide a vital space for community
healing and celebration.

“There are so many things that happen that day that are always
miracles,” said Jacque Wilson, coordinator of the Bois Forte Urban
Office and an organizer of the powwow.

The morning of the powwow, Sandra White Hawk (Sicangu Lakota) gathers
with adoptees, formerly fostered individuals and birth relatives to
visit with one another and share their experiences. White Hawk has been
an organizer of the powwow since its beginning, and she remains an
intrepid advocate for First Nations people impacted by foster care or
adoption. Among her myriad roles, she serves as the director of First
Nations Repatriation Institute.

Too often, conversations about the trauma caused by family separation
and adoption remain buried under a veil of silence, explained White
Hawk. Some attendees have never had the opportunity to attend a powwow
or connect with the American Indian community. White Hawk works hard to
foster a ceremonious and welcoming environment. “We mostly want to give
them an opportunity to share in a way that they’ve probably never been
able to,” White Hawk said.

For over a decade, a group of Native adoptees and formerly fostered
individuals in Minneapolis have met each month to support one another.
Many of them come out every first Saturday in November to welcome those
returning to the circle. “Because of their healing as part of this
community, they are there to greet our new people who have never been
here before,” said White Hawk. Elders also share stories about the
painful history of removal and cultural erasure in American Indian
communities that ripped thousands of youth away from their families and
tribal identity.

The space also welcomes and receives birth mothers. White Hawk hopes
that the gathering can serve as a time for birth mothers to develop
compassion for themselves and shed layers of guilt or shame. “For our
mothers who lost [children] under all kinds of circumstances, our hope
is that we continue to encourage them to be a part of our circle,” said
White Hawk. “They gave us life and that was the most important thing.”

Following the morning gathering, the powwow begins in the auditorium.
Community members are invited and encouraged to attend. The entrance of
the color guard in the grand entry signals the celebration’s beginning.
Adoptees and formerly fostered relatives follow in their stead, making
their way back to the circle. In the eyes of White Hawk, the following
“Wablenica ceremony” is dedicated to “taking care of the hearts of our
relative who are making their way back to this circle and the hearts of
our relatives who lost us.”

The ceremony can be laden with emotion, particularly grief, at the
beginning, she said. But by the end, the adoptees and formerly fostered
individuals stand in the circle and the community comes forward to
welcome them. “Our hearts are just lifted,” she said. “Some people have
never heard the phrase, ‘welcome home,’ and it makes them feel the
acceptance and sense of belonging that is so needed for our people.”

For many, this is the day that healing begins.

Fifteen years of dedication from three Native women

Sandy White Hawk. (Photocourtesy of Red Lake Nation News.)
The powwow started in 2003 with a call for healing. And Jacque
Wilson, Sandra White Hawk and Tina Knafla are three women whose lives
have been touched both personally and professionally by the impacts of
American Indian adoption and foster care. Throughout their lives of
service, they each have seen and felt the intergenerational trauma
present in their communities. “There is so much pain around adoption and
the loss of children because of the Indian adoption era and the
boarding school era,” said Knafla, who in 2003, worked with Hennepin
County as an ICWA adoptions recruiter. “I really felt like we needed to
address that.”

In addition to the forcible placement of American Indian children
into abusive boarding schools beginning in the 1860s, the Child Welfare
League of America instituted the Indian Adoption Project from 1958 to
1967. The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the U.S. Children’s Bureau were
also complicit in this program. The government ripped American Indian
children away from their tribes and families and placed a vast majority
of them into non-Native foster or adoptive homes. According to a 1976
surveys commissioned by the Association on American Indian Affairs, 25
to 35 percent of American
Indian children were removed from their
families between 1941 and 1967.

After exhaustive calls for justice from Native communities, The
Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was enacted in 1978 by Congress. It
requires the state to place American Indian children experiencing foster
care with family or relatives as often as possible. But only about half
of Native children in foster care in Minnesota find Native homes,
according to the Minnesota Department of Human Services. And the trauma
from these twentieth century policies linger in the lives of adoptees
and their communities who still reckon with family separation.

After attending a National Indian Child Welfare Association
conference in Duluth in 2003, Knafla felt compelled to expand
opportunities for healing with the support of the county. She began
reaching out to community agencies and colleagues, including White Hawk
and Wilson, to uplift resources for Native communities processing the
impacts of family separation. The three women believed that a powwow
would provide a needed space for healing and celebration.

Organizers obtained the sponsorship of Hennepin County and the
Minnesota Department of Human Services, among other community agencies.
This support continues to keep the powwow strong and sustained. “That
collaboration is very unique between Hennepin County and the community,”
said Knafla. “We’re still here, 14 years strong.”

The year the powwow began, Wilson worked in the juvenile justice
courts representing state tribes in child welfare cases. She yearned to
see foster families participating in more culturally-relevant
activities. In her eyes, the powwow would provide an opportunity for
foster youth to establish a connection to their identity.

“The more the children know about who they are and where they come
from, the less traumatic it is for them,” explained Wilson. “It also
gives them a place to look for answers when they become older.”

Although her job has since changed, Wilson continues to support
people who she said have been away from their families or tribes for a
generation or more. The gathering would also be an opportunity to
connect families with foster care agencies to expand the availability of
culturally-involved, Native homes for youth still in foster care.

“This powwow is still important to me because that trauma has not
gone away on many levels,” she said. “It’s always important for
[returnees] to learn who they are, because in order to be a full human
being, it’s best that you know who you are, where you came from, or your
people.”

Adoptees from all over the country attend the powwow in Minneapolis.
“We’re trying to share what we’ve learned and get other tribes and
communities to recognize their returning adoptees and birth mothers in
whatever kind of ceremonies they want to do,” said Wilson.

Organizers of the powwow envision a time when reservations and Native
communities across the country create their own spaces that encourage
returning relatives to heal.

Thursday, November 1, 2018

Official
Statement: Joint Statement on the Federal District Court of Northern
Texas denying to stay the court’s ruling on constitutionality of the
Indian Child Welfare Act

(Portland, OR, October 30, 2018)—The
National Indian Child Welfare Association, the National Congress of
American Indians, the Association on American Indian Affairs, and the
Native American Rights Fund are disappointed that the Federal District
Court of Northern Texas has denied a motion to stay their decision in Brackeen v. Zinke
pending appeal by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. This will likely
cause great uncertainty and disruption for hundreds of vulnerable Indian
children and their families who are currently in state child welfare
systems within the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Indiana, especially
as we enter the holiday season and the Fifth Circuit moves forward with
what may be months of proceedings. Indian children and families deserve
better, and we hope that the Fifth Circuit will move quickly to consider
a motion to stay this lower federal court decision.
# # #Read the full joint statement here.

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

This documentary concerns Canada’s infamous “boarding schools,” a
program for indigenous Canadian children started in 1876 by Canada’s
first prime minister John McDonald. Under this system, native children
were forcibly removed (and in some cases kidnapped) from their families
to attend religious boarding schools. The goal was to forcibly totally
separate the children’s from their families’ native language and
culture.
The government wanted access to mineral deposits on treaty lands.
Rather than going to war with their indigenous population, they stole
their children to extinguish them as communities and nations.
The last boarding school closed in 1996.
Most of the film consists of interviews with boarding school
survivors. They talk of being forbidden to speak their native language,
harsh beatings for minor infractions, a continuous diet of mushy
oatmeal, lack of heating in winter and frequent sexual abuse. The death
rate for children who attended these boarding schools was 24-40%.
In 1980, a group of boarding school survivors began a long court
action that in 2008 resulted in the formation of a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The goal of the TRC hearings, which
went on for seven years, was for boarding school survivors to document
their years of abuse and trauma for posterity.

Sunday, October 28, 2018

Beyond high fives and selfies … Indian youth explore policy issues

“The Indian Child Welfare act was created in order to protect the best
interest of Indian Children and to promote the stability and security of
tribal communities and families. We as youth leaders know that our
identity; is who we are, is within our culture, and within the tribal
community that raises us. Our membership and blood quantum has never
defined us as members of our tribal communities. To us, we are raised by
tribal communities, because we learn not just from our family but from
the community as a whole. They teach us our languages, our traditions,
they show us who we are as American Indian/Alaskan Native youth, that is
a right every American Indian/Alaskan Native child should have. They
should not be taken from their tribal community, because when they are, a
piece of our culture is lost.”

“And Our Mothers Cried” vividly brings to life the Indian boarding school era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. For several generations of Native American children, including some Chickasaws, attending boarding school meant separation from their families and indoctrination into a culture that wasn’t their own. The schools, which were guided by the infamous slogan, “Kill the Indian. Save the Man,” prohibited most students from speaking their own language and emphasized labor-intensive trades that would assimilate them into white culture through military-type institutions.
The documentary presents a stark contrast between these schools and schools established and operated by the Chickasaw Nation, which were designed to prepare Chickasaw children to compete in a rapidly changing world. “And Our Mothers Cried” presents compelling stories from some of the Chickasaw elders who lived through the boarding school era. Their experiences weave a complex story of sorrow and survival, but also one of hope and resilience from a time when tribal governments and culture were under attack.

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Congress passed the ICWA in 1978 in an attempt to reverse the ravages that forced separation of Native children from their families wrought on Indian people. In Native cultures, families are the center of our communities, and children are sacred gifts from the Creator. Judge O’Connor’s ruling not only threatens our future – it outright discounts generations of historical anguish. The ruling also ignores the rights of tribes as sovereign governments. The ICWA only applies to children from federally recognized tribes, and tribes – as sovereign governments – are the only legal authority to determine the membership of a tribe. Destroying a tribe’s ability to speak out for its future – our children – undermines the modern efforts of tribal government to overcome hundreds of years oppression because of the U.S. government’s aggressive control over every aspect of tribal citizens’ lives, including our relationships with our own children.

Sherry Treppa is chair of the Habematolel Pomo tribe of Upper Lake, Calif.

Monday, October 22, 2018

Thousands of Canada’s indigenous children died in church-run boarding schools

Armed with everything from school attendance records to drones, researchers across Canada are racing to shed light on a bleak part of the country’s history: How many indigenous children died at residential schools, and where are their unmarked graves? From 1883 to 1998, nearly 150,000 indigenous children were forcibly separated from their families and sent to the government-funded, church-run boarding schools in an attempt to assimilate them. Once there, they were frequently neglected and abused. What happened at the schools was akin to “cultural genocide,” concluded a 2015 report from Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It also found that at least 3,200 students died at residential schools over those 115 years — a much higher rate than for students elsewhere in Canada — though the commission contended that the number was probably much higher and merited further investigation.

The religious organizations that operated the schools — the Anglican Church of Canada, Presbyterian Church in Canada, United Church of Canada, Jesuits of English Canada and some Catholic groups — in 2015 expressed regret for the “well-documented” abuses. The Catholic Church has never offered an official apology, something that Trudeau and others have repeatedly called for.

NORMAN, Okla. — The Native American Journalist
Association, based in Norman, Oklahoma sent a letter critical of the Los
Angeles Times publishing an op-ed that allowed a writer to call for the
elimination of the landmark 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act.

Here is the letter sent to the Los Angeles Times:

The Native American Journalists Association is disappointed in the lack
of due diligence demonstrated by the Los Angeles Times in publishing the
op-ed “Does the Indian Child Welfare Act protect tribal interests at
the expense of children?” We call on the organization and the opinion
section to review their policies and practices in light of its unchecked
dissemination of anti-Indian propaganda.

The Times published an Oct. 12 op-ed by Naomi Schaefer Riley in which
Schaefer Riley advocates for the elimination of the Indian Child Welfare
Act (ICWA) by deliberately misrepresenting the law to readers – a
tactic organizations labeled hate groups have used in an attempt to
undermine the law.

NAJA is dismayed that the Times would publish opinions that align so
closely with views held by established anti-Indian hate groups and calls
on the paper to review their op-ed policies and journalistic standards.
It is chilling that a revered organization like the Times would lack
the ability to identify the difference between informed opinion on
important and consequential Indigenous issues, and talking points
advocated by anti-Indian hate groups based on stereotypes and
misinformation.

For this reason, NAJA has published a guide on best practices when
reporting on ICWA cases to provide newsrooms with the tools to provide
readers with accurate and contextual coverage on the topic. NAJA
consistently advocates for consultation with tribal leaders and
authorities. Had the Times’ editors consulted any tribal leaders, they
would have learned that tribal nations within the United States do NOT
support the elimination of ICWA.

NAJA also recommends that reporters never refer to blood quantum when
covering ICWA cases. The law applies to citizens of tribal nations as
determined by that nation, not federally imposed standards like degree
of Indian blood. Measuring the amount of Indian blood a child has is an
inherent act of racism. However, Schaefer Riley's op-ed hinges on this
idea then leans on stereotypes such as poverty, domestic abuse and drug
use to paint a disparaging picture of Indigenous families to suggest
that those communities lack the ability to provide children a good life.

We encourage the Times to follow the journalistic practices established
by Indigenous journalists and endorsed by NAJA to provide ethical and
culturally sensitive coverage to readers, instead of providing a
platform for hate groups and their sympathizers to promulgate
anti-Indian propaganda.

The Nation’s First Family Separation Policy

Forty years ago, three in 10 Indian children were taken from their families.
October 9, 2018 | Christie Renick

The United States’ first family separation policy removed one-third of all American Indian children from their families and tribes.

In the late 1960s, while employed by the Association on American Indian Affairs (AAIA), a New York-based attorney named Bertram Hirsch was sent to North Dakota to assist with a kinship dispute case on behalf of the Spirit Lake Tribe. Child welfare workers were forcibly removing children from family members and placing them in white homes, sometimes out of state. One grandmother had even been jailed after refusing to give up her grandchildren.
At the time, Hirsch says, he had no idea that an alarming number of American Indian children were being taken from their families and permanently placed in homes with white parents.
But as he worked on the Spirit Lake case, he began to understand the scope of the problem. And by the time 1969 rolled around, he and the AAIA were deeply engaged in a nationwide data collection project that had him contacting every foster care or adoption agency and institution he could find. He surveyed the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which had the authority to place children at that time, and state social services departments as well as juvenile probation facilities.Hirsch’s research found that somewhere between 25 and 35 percent of all American Indian children had been placed in adoptive homes, foster homes or institutions.

Around 90 percent of those children were being raised by non-Indians.

Many would never see their biological families again.

By the end of 1978, Hirsch had conducted his audit twice. Congressional commissions had convened in Washington numerous times, gathering hundreds of hours of testimony on the government’s egregious treatment of American Indian communities.

In its report to Congress, a task force said,
“The removal of Indian children from their natural homes and tribal setting has been and continues to be a national crisis.”

The government-sanctioned removals were a wound for Native families and tribes that would be torn raw with each new generation.
Hirsch, along with two Congressional staffers, wrote and rewrote a bill to shield American Indian youth from being removed from their families and tribes. A culmination of what Hirsch describes as a huge grassroots effort spanning 11 years and involving thousands of people across the country, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was passed at the 11th hour, just before the 95th Congress would come to a close, on October 24, 1978.
“If we didn’t get it passed in the 95th,” Hirsch said, “I’m not sure it ever would have passed.”
ICWA defined the political relationship between two sovereigns – tribes and states. It designated that tribes can and must act as parents for their children, just as states do with non-Native children, when biological parents cannot. And it required that preference be given to tribal communities when children must be removed from their homes.

But 40 years later, states still don’t fully understand ICWA. One judge described ICWA as the most ignored federal law in the history of this country.
The federal government has no ICWA data reporting requirements in place.Caseworkers and attorneys have been reported as viewing ICWA compliance as optional. Notice to tribes that an Indian child has entered foster care has been delayed by as many as four years, tribes have said.

And just last week, a federal district court judge ruled that the law was unconstitutional, rendering the fate of ICWA uncertain.

Tuesday, October 9, 2018

CITATIONBual, Harman
(2018)
"Native American Rights & Adoption by Non-Indian Families: The
Manipulation and Distortion of Public Opinion to Overthrow ICWA,"
American Indian Law Journal: Vol. 6
:
Iss.
2
, Article 6.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/ailj/vol6/iss2/6

Excerpt:

The public’s general lack of
knowledge regarding the history of ICWA and the standards set up by ICWA allows
for easy manipulation by adoption agencies and ICWA opponents. A lack of understanding
and sensationalized media supports a negative image of Indian tribes that
overshadows the protections offered by ICWA, and the improper behavior of
adoption agencies and attorneys who encourage adoptive parents to go against
the clear standards set out in ICWA.117

This is a difficult situation to
address, given the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Baby Veronica, because
it fails to acknowledge the historical reasoning for ICWA and maintaining a relationship
between an Indian child and its tribe.118

However, the behavior of these adoption
agencies and attorneys who are creating delays in the system, and actively
working the system to get around ICWA statues, should face some sort of
monetary fine. Fines would need to be determined on a case by case basis, but
could be based on whether there were improper delay tactics, the length of time
the litigation took due to improper delay tactics, and whether the adoption
agency knew or had reason to know the child was an Indian. Policies surrounding the
custody of children as a whole are inconsistent and create conflicting goals
and procedural issues when applied.119

To overcome these issues, it is
necessary that both legislators and ICWA supporters find a common ground where
the agencies responsible for determining a child’s membership status are able
to do so in a timely manner and hold foster families and Indian families
accountable if they fail to follow reunification plans set by these state agencies.

Despite the intent of Congress,
state courts have continuously interpreted ICWA in a variety of ways that has
created loopholes around the mandates.121

Large cases in front of the Supreme
Court of the United States has brought attention to ICWA on a national level.122

However, ICWA is often portrayed as a set of rules that ignores the best
interest of the Indian child in favor of satisfying the demands of Indian
tribes who may not be capable of taking care of the Indian child as well as an
already established home with an adoptive family.123

This perception has been
further manipulated within the media by ICWA opposition in an effort to dismantle
ICWA.

The history and purpose of ICWA
has been misinterpreted by courts applying it within custody cases of Indian children.
For ICWA to be successful, it is necessary that states and courts identify

the child’s tribe and give proper
notification to the tribes. ICWA was established to stabilize the growth of
tribes that had diminished after decades of assimilation of tribal members into
mainstream American society. Despite the set guidelines within ICWA, states apply
ICWA differently within each court, which creates disproportionate protection
to Indian children, parents, and tribes.124

To combat improper application of ICWA it is necessary that clarification
of ICWA is provided to state child welfare workers, adoption agencies, judges,
and society.

Media uses the emotional pull within ICWA adoption cases between
Indian tribes and non-Indian adoptive families to undermine the protection
given to tribes under ICWA and limit tribal rights.

Proper application of ICWA would
prevent many of the cases being reported on by news media because many years of
litigation would be avoided. And most importantly, the Indian child developing
ties to a family the child should not have legally been placed with could be
prevented because many years of litigation would be avoided. And most importantly,
the Indian child developing ties to a family the child should not have legally
been placed with could be prevented.

Use the search bar on this blog to find #ICWA and stories about lost children of the Indian Adoption Projects and Programs and 60s Scoop... Thousands of children were stolen by the govt's of Canada and the US and adopted out - this blog is about survivors.

In a decision published by the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was
declared unconstitutional, jeopardizing the landmark legislation
protecting tribal children.

This egregious decision ignores the direct federal
government-to-government relationship and decades upon decades of
precedent that have upheld tribal sovereignty and the rights of Indian
children and families. Through 40 years of implementation, ICWA’s goal
is to promote family stability and integrity. It continues to be the
gold standard in child welfare policy.

While this disturbing ruling is a pivotal moment for Indian Country,
we vehemently reject any opinion that separates Native children from
their families and will continue to fight to uphold ICWA and tribal
sovereignty.

Monday, October 8, 2018

Calls judge’s ruling ‘an outlier, out of step with the law and constitutional jurisprudence’

The Partnership for Native Children strongly disagrees with and is disturbed by Judge O’Connor’s decision in Brackeen v. Zinke which
has stricken down the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) four decades
after it was enacted. This is the first decision of its kind, and is an
outlier—out of step with the law and decades of constitutional
jurisprudence.

With the support and guidance of a longstanding coalition of anti-ICWA activists, the plantiffs in Brackeen
want to remove ICWA’s provisions that protect against removing Native
children from their parents and culture, leaving unfettered access to
Native children. Not content with that outcome, they wish to undermine
the U.S. Constitution and centuries of established law by eradicating
tribes’ Constitutionally-protected relationship with the United States
government.

Although this decision is limited in application, it serves as a roadmap
for other ICWA litigation intending to overturn ICWA and we should
expect future litigation seeking to undermine tribal sovereignty and
federal Indian law writ large.

Emboldened by the Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl decision in
2013, these anti-ICWA forces—led by the adoption industry, religious
coalitions, and a conservative think tank—have spent years bringing
forth suit after suit in courts throughout the country, sometimes even
using identical briefs in different forums, all in the attempt to have
ICWA declared unconstitutional. After losing each case, due in part to
their outrageous contention that ICWA is a race-based law (it is not),
they have finally found a judge in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Texas sympathetic to their arguments.

While they choose to ignore thousands of testimonials from Native
families who assert that those who will be most hurt by this decisions
are our most sacred and vulnerable children, the Partnership for Native
Children stands with Indian Country and affirms that we will continue to
fight for them. We support legal efforts to appeal this unprecedented
decision. We will work tirelessly to demand the media cover these issues
thoroughly and responsibly. And we will work closely with those
children, families, and tribes who want their perspectives finally
included in the national dialogue about the best interests of our
children. Their voices have been ignored for far too long.

The Partnership for Native Children refuses to go back to those the days
where tribal children were removed simply because of cultural
misunderstandings, for financial gain, and due to pure prejudice. We
also refuse to let extremist groups use our children as a tool to
undermine the foundations of Indian law and tribal sovereignty.

The Partnership for Native Children remains unwavering in our commitment
to defend the constitutionality of ICWA by all available means and will
continue to work in support of tribes and Native people throughout the
country to ensure that Native children, families, and tribes are
protected.

Saturday, October 6, 2018

The California Tribal Families Coalition joined others nationwide in expressing disappointment over the ruling.

In an unprecedented ruling that threatens Native American children
and families, U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern
District of Texas declared the federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA)
unconstitutional in an opinion in Brackeen et. al. v. Zinke, filed October 4, 2018.

While unnerving, attorneys fighting for ICWA say the decision is
not applicable throughout the United States. Rather, it is limited in
scope and will likely be stayed pending appeal. The decision from a U.S.
District Court in Texas is not applicable in California.

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) is a 40-year old remedial
statute that protects Indian children, families and tribes. The original
complaint was filed by adoptive parents and supported by Texas, Indiana
and Louisiana, and the decision is contrary to Congressional intent,
the Constitution and decades of well-established Indian law.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a bipartisan
coalition of Attorneys General, filed an amicus brief in the case to
defend the ICWA. ICWA sets specific child welfare rules designed to
ensure that cases regarding abuse, neglect and adoption involving Native
American children are handled in a culturally appropriate manner.

“Those of us who were raised in Indian Country, those of us who
raise our children on the reservations, those of us who know Indian
families – we know that ICWA protects our children. This targeted and
well-financed attack on ICWA only reminds tribes of the long and
tortured history we have endured in the United States,” Robert Smith,
chairman of the California Tribal Families Coalition and the Pala Band
of Mission Indians.

About the California Tribal Families Coalition.

Comprised of tribes and tribal leaders from across the state, the
California Tribal Families Coalition’s mission is to promote and protect
the health, safety and welfare of tribal children and families, which
are inherent tribal governmental functions and are at the core of tribal
sovereignty and tribal governance. For information, please visithttps://www.caltribalfamilies.org

Friday, October 5, 2018

We strongly disagree and are deeply disappointed with Judge O’Connor’s decision inBrackeen v. Zinkein
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas striking
down the Indian Child Welfare Act, four decades after it was enacted. We
remain steadfast in our commitment to defend the constitutionality of
ICWA by all available means for one simple reason: If ICWA is struck
down in whole or in part, the victims will be our children and our
families, Native children and Native families.

The
apparent goal of Plaintiffs’ litigation is an extreme one — to separate
children from their parents. Before ICWA, as many as one-third of all
tribal children were forcibly removed from their families and their
communities by state governments. Thorough and objective analysis of the
systematic removal of Indian children from Indian homes found many
removals were wholly unjustified. These policies devastated tribal
communities and we refuse to go back to those darker days. We are
heartened by the support of so many states that stand shoulder to
shoulder with us in this litigation to protect families.

We
are in consultation with our legal counsel and exploring all available
options. Rest assured, we consider the trial level decision today as
one part of a long process. In the interim, we will seek a stay of the
decision until higher courts have an opportunity to review it. We will
continue to work in state courts throughout the country to ensure the
protections of ICWA for Native children, families, and tribes. We
strongly believe that, in the end, our rights protected by the Indian
Child Welfare Act will be affirmed and reinforced.

60s Scoop Settlement

Dawnland 2018

where were you adopted?

Every. Day.

adoptees take back adoption narrative and reject propaganda

#WeShallContinue

To Veronica Brown

Veronica, we adult adoptees are thinking of you today and every day. We will be here when you need us. Your journey in the adopted life has begun, nothing can revoke that now, the damage cannot be undone. Be courageous, you have what no adoptee before you has had; a strong group of adult adoptees who know your story, who are behind you and will always be so.

Join!

National Indigenous Survivors of Child Welfare Network (NISCWN)

Membership Application Form

The Network is open to all Indigenous and Foster Care Survivors any time.

Read this SERIES

our new book trailer

ADOPTION TRUTH

As the single largest unregulated industry in the United States, adoption is viewed as a benevolent action that results in the formation of “forever families.” The truth is that it is a very lucrative business with a known sales pitch. With profits last estimated at over $1.44 billion dollars a year, mothers who consider adoption for their babies need to be very aware that all of this promotion clouds the facts and only though independent research can they get an accurate account of what life might be like for both them and their child after signing the adoption paperwork.

TWO WORLDS Book 1 (second edition)

v

Two Worlds anthology (Vol. 1)

“…sometimes shocking, often an emotional read…this book is for individuals interested in the culture and history of the Native American Indian, but also on the reading lists of universities offering ethnic/culture/Native studies.”

“Well-researched and obviously a subject close to the heart of the authors/compilers, I found the extent of what can only be described as ‘child-snatching’ from the Native Americans quite staggering. It’s not something I was aware of before…”

“The individual pieces are open and honest and give a good insight into the turmoil of dislocation from family and tribe… I think it does have value and a story to tell. I was affected by the stories I read, and amazed by the facts presented…. because it is saying something new, interesting and often astonishing.”

Did you know?

Good words

I agree with you on the caring of “orphans” – true orphans, not “paper orphans” as Kathryn Joyce describes in her book, The Child Catchers. The most important thing to remember, however, is that the orphan’s original identity and family connection and heritage must remain intact and available to him or her forever. This business of adoption – and I do mean the multi-billion-dollar, unregulated business of adoption – of wiping out the child’s original identity, falsifying birth records with the adopters’ names, altering facts such as place of birth, severing familial kinship, must stop … Immediately. And the outrageous injustices foisted upon adoptees and their families for the past 100 years must be addressed and righted. We are faced today with six to seven million people who were basically legally kidnapped, sold to the highest bidder, their identities falsified, and placed in a lifelong, imposed witness protection program for which there is no legal recourse. Then told by church officials, agency and government functionaries that they have no right to know who they are, to do genealogy or learn about important family medical history, or know the identity of or associate with blood relatives. This is how the Judeo-Christian society has interpreted “caring for orphans”, for it’s own selfish interests and greed. Starting with Georgia Tann, the woman charged with kidnapping and selling 5,000 children, most of whom were given to the rich and powerful who then colluded with her to “seal” adoptions and cover their nefarious activities (see, for example, Gov. Herbert Lehman, NY, 1935).

We are #49 in the world?

Disclosure Statement

“We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.”If you buy our books from Amazon, we receive a small payment.